What if america joined the central powers

[Aaron Fox]

So, the HSF breaks out and does what, exactly?

Causes all sorts of havoc in the logistics lanes. With the US as a base, even small portions of the HSF would be dangerous for the future convoys. Remember, the British went with Q-ships and the like because the U-Boats and the convoy attacks were surprisingly effective.

I've given a POD - in 1914 Wilson stands up for the rights of Neutrals.
Briths/French "rules of blockade" had been concocted in the early hours of the day they were announced and contravened what the UK championed in the 19th century ...
In OTL, due to his need for votes from the SOuth, the Wilson administration demanded that cotton be let through to Germany.

While it might work, there is plenty of evidence that Wilson was very pro-Britain/Entente.

The navy was decent, even if lacking in light units. But these can be built relatively quickly.
The state of the US army is best left unmentioned. It would be a mob armed with rifles up to at least 1917 if not longer. And even when given artillery it would carry out human wave attacks like in OTL 1918.

Eh, it wasn't that bad for the US Army. The major problem is Congress kept screwing over the purse strings, making it impossible to keep institutional knowledge and get heavy equipment. It must be noted that the US learned quite quickly despite their initial failings in OTL, and I wouldn't be surprised that the Germans would help them in this regard.

 

[Knowledgeispower]

In this proposed scenario the thing that would keep the the RN's Admirals awake at night would be the threat of the German Battlecruisers breaking out and sailing off to the US to be based there and then raiding shipping in the Atlantic

 

[Buba]

What shipping?
The board has been reset, this is not a replay of OTL WWI/WWII. Shipping lanes will be different.
Besides Halifax/St.John (which I do not see the UK losing, unless very unlucky) military supply convoys, there will be no Entente flagged Europe-North America traffic.
Ships sailing from the Carribean/Colombia/Venezuela will take a slight detour towards the east, closer to African and European shores, i.e. Trinidad - Cabo Verde - Canaries - Madeira - Portugal - Biscaya. Some shipping which normally would had sailed to Nantes or Bordeaux might go to Marseilles instead, to get it out of harm's way.
Good luck with raiding the waters off Madeira or the Western Approaches from Boston using German battlecruisers.
E.g. - Boston to Lisbon is c.2,8Knm/c.5K km.
SMS Seydlitz - 4,2K nm at 14kn. Not much wiggle room, and recoaling on the high seas was not a thing.

 

[Aaron Fox]

What shipping?
The board has been reset, this is not a replay of OTL WWI/WWII. Shipping lanes will be different.
Besides Halifax/St.John (which I do not see the UK losing, unless very unlucky) military supply convoys, there will be no Entente flagged Europe-North America traffic.
Ships sailing from the Carribean/Colombia/Venezuela will take a slight detour towards the east, closer to African and European shores, i.e. Trinidad - Cabo Verde - Canaries - Madeira - Portugal - Biscaya. Some shipping which normally would had sailed to Nantes or Bordeaux might go to Marseilles instead, to get it out of harm's way.
Good luck with raiding the waters off Madeira or the Western Approaches from Boston using German battlecruisers.
E.g. - Boston to Lisbon is c.2,8Knm/c.5K km.
SMS Seydlitz - 4,2K nm at 14kn. Not much wiggle room, and recoaling on the high seas was not a thing.

What people forget is that Britain and France had to ship a lot of Colonial troops to the Western Front, and those are the most vulnerable. Not to mention that Britain needs Canada and other colonies to keep the nation fed.

Having access to US ports is a major game-changer in this regard, as is access to the Panama Canal.

 

[Buba]

1 - IMO the USA overruns Canada. Nova Scotia should hold, however.
2a - Mayhaps you are thinking of the XIXth Corps? That was from Algeria. Other French Colonial troops on the Western Front came from sub-Saharan Africa.
2b - the UK does not get Imperial Stormtroopers, i.e. the Canadian Corps. The West India Regiment and British West Indies Regiment (you cannot have simply ONE regiment, the British have to confuse the enemy somehow) are more or less a Division's worth of Infantry - these will stay in the Carribean, I'd wager. ANZAC - too many butterflies to say where and when are those 5+1 Divisions deployed.
3 - Panama Canal - indeed, exciting
4 - feeding the UK and France without US and Canada - tough. Like I've written before, Argentina and Australia with wheat and beef/mutton, plus Burma and SEA with rice could be enough to take up the slack. Opening the Turkish Straits becomes even more important than in OTL. So, maybe more forces diverted to various anti-Ottoman fronts?

 

[Aaron Fox]

1 - IMO the USA overruns Canada. Nova Scotia should hold, however.
2a - Mayhaps you are thinking of the XIXth Corps? That was from Algeria. Other French Colonial troops on the Western Front came from sub-Saharan Africa.
2b - the UK does not get Imperial Stormtroopers, i.e. the Canadian Corps. The West Indies Regiment and British West Inidies Regiment (you cannot have simply ONE regiment, the British have to confuse the enemy somehow) are more or less Division's worth of Infantry - these will stay in the Carribean, I'd wager. ANZAC - too many butterflies to say where and when are those 5+1 Divisions deployed.
3 - Panama Canal - indeed, exciting

1. Canada's fate is sealed at this point, as it doesn't have the spread out industrial capacity to take the hits necessary, it's all centered around Toronto.
2. I was thinking of the various French Askari (African Colonial Troops) and Britain's oh god so many Canadian and Indian troops.
3. There is a reason that by WW2 the core of any 'take the US out' plan centers around destroying the canal.

 

[Buba]

No Canadians, I agree.
No Indian troops ever saw the Atlantic, hence I do not see the relevance. In OTL had a very brief presence in France - and landed in Marsellies. Otherwise in Middle East or East Africa.
Just like in 18th Century Britain paid Prussia, here the UK would pay (suitably disguised) Japan for its ground troops in the Pacifc.

 

[Knowledgeispower]

3. There is a reason that by WW2 the core of any 'take the US out' plan centers around destroying the canal.

Which is why the US built fortifications like Crazy to cover the Canal albeit they were still in large part being built in 1914. Mind you the RN and MN don't really have enough capital ships to meet their commitments in Europe and fight the US Battlefleet at the same time(and attacking the Canal would get the USN's battlefleet to sortie) and really wouldn't at any point in the war especially if the US naval building program is accelerated which it would be since unlike otl the US doesn't have to build up a massive expeditionary army(which will save a lot of resources albeit I imagine a fair bit of those resources will go into making coastal defenses)and a metric crapload of destroyers and subchasers at the expense of nearly everything else navally speaking being rather delayed and moreover unlike otl the US navy would need a lot of modern cruisers(and Battlecruisers albeit probably something more reasonable would be built as compared to the Lexingtons and for that matter the Omahas)to fight the war it would find itself in

Also it occurs to me that unlike otl the Mark 1 16" gun will probably be put into service way earlier than the Colorados.

 

[Knowledgeispower]

Also it occurs to me in this scenario Argentina isn't getting it's two Rivadiva class Dreadnoughts which are both fairly powerful units to add to the USN's battleline

 

[Airedale260]

OH DEAR GOD IT’S STARTING OVER HERE NOW...

[Screams internally]

Okay, with that out of the way...

If the U.S. is not selling to the Entente, the Entente is fucked six ways to Sunday.

The USN is actually pretty understrength at this point: No real cruiser force and one battleship per year. In 1914 they were more focused on the Army rather than the Navy.

The Army is in okay shape at this point -it can’t go conquer Canada off the bat, but it can get up to speed in a hurry and has the ability to train up four soldiers for every single Canadian in a couple years’ time.

Halifax is going to be a priority target: It’s the one base the British can use to stage serious attacks against the U.S. But even then it may be limited, because the Royal Navy is not going to weaken the blockade against the HSF to fight the USN, because only one of them has the ability to actually land troops to threaten London, and it sure as shit ain’t the USN.

What likely happens is a negotiated peace because the British won’t be able to prop up the French, and if the Americans get involved, the British peace out. France, meanwhile, gets hosed and quite possibly winds up going fascist. Germany is now the undisputed hegemon of Central Europe, the U.S. is the undisputed master of North America, and the British...well, they still have the Empire.

 

[Free-Stater 101]

Why is everyone obsessed with bringing up the U.S. as it was in 1914? The OP states the U.S. will enter 1916 with I assume no previoust buildup of the military other than what it would have haf in OTL.

 

[Prince Ire]

While the American Army was definitely tiny in 1914 and almost half of it was stationed overseas, it was still massively larger than the Canadian Army was at the outbreak of the war.

 

[Knowledgeispower]

The USN is actually pretty understrength at this point: No real cruiser force and one battleship per year. In 1914 they were more focused on the Army rather than the Navy.

The Army is in okay shape at this point -it can’t go conquer Canada off the bat, but it can get up to speed in a hurry and has the ability to train up four soldiers for every single Canadian in a couple years’ time.

I will note that with two exceptions(1912 and 1913 which produced the Pennsylvania class with the order being split across the two years) the USN was building two capital ships per year and was also the 3rd Largest navy in terms of tonnage on the planet and some rather favorable geography. Mind you it really did need more destroyers(which can built rather quickly) and a fair few modern cruisers and also some Battlecruisers.

 

[Knowledgeispower]

While the American Army was definitely tiny in 1914 and almost half of it was stationed overseas, it was still massively larger than the Canadian Army was at the outbreak of the war.

And the national guard was sizable as well albeit not of very high quality. Mind you as garrison troops occupying Canada and in the Carribean/Bermuda they'll do

 

[Free-Stater 101]

Effects of hostile USA in 1914 are negligible.

With a hostile USA since 1914 events would had run very differently.

Of course if for some reason the US went rabidly anti-entente even as early as 1914

And then we have to account for the fact that a US at war in 1914

It might not be as easy as some are thinking given how limited the US military was in 1914 but sheer weight of numbers makes it pretty much inevitable.

While the American Army was definitely tiny in 1914

Guys look at the OP...

How would the world history and the world in general be changed if America joined the central powers in 1916?

We are talking about the U.S. entering in 1916 not 1914!

 

[Knowledgeispower]

Guys look at the OP...

We are talking about the U.S. entering in 1916 not 1914!

Ah in that case the US can't give the New Mexicos 16" guns(dammm you Secretary of the Navy Daniels for being an idiot)and the Argentines get their Dreadnoughts. On the positive side of things the Army is a bit larger and the coastal defenses of Panama and Manilla Bay in particular and the US in general will be significantly stronger and the Nevadas and Pennsylvanias will have joined the fleet

 

[Aaron Fox]

I will note that with two exceptions(1912 and 1913 which produced the Pennsylvania class with the order being split across the two years) the USN was building two capital ships per year and was also the 3rd Largest navy in terms of tonnage on the planet and some rather favorable geography. Mind you it really did need more destroyers(which can built rather quickly) and a fair few modern cruisers and also some Battlecruisers.

That and it had plenty of shipbuilding capacity too.

We are talking about the U.S. entering in 1916 not 1914!

The thing with that is the USN had always specified Britain as the main antagonist on the open seas, and the various papers they did over the pre-WW2 years outright state that the British are willing to do some pretty underhanded tactics to ensure their supremacy (these sort of papers would eventually evolve into what would become War Plan Red). So it is more likely that as the clouds of war gathered, the USN manages to get Congress to not cut its budget (a-fucking-gain) and certain firebrands like Senator 'Pitchfork' Tillman die earlier.

 

[Knowledgeispower]

In other words @Aaron Fox Josephus Daniels gets told to take a hike and the New Mexicos get built with their orginally intended design which improved the armor over the previous classes and was armed with 10 16" guns.(well that or basically an early Colorado class gets built) and Congress will probably have forked over the cash to get the construction of at least some modern cruisers and more destroyers than otl underway. Heck assuming they're feeling generous they might even fund some extra capital ships and given the situation I suspect the USN will have those be Battlecruisers if at all possible. And the cruisers and Battlecruisers will probably have pretty long legs for the era(which was typical for USN designs) which will make them fine commerce raiders

 

[Aaron Fox]

In other words @Aaron Fox Josephus Daniels gets told to take a hike and the New Mexicos get built with their orginally intended design which improved the armor over the previous classes and was armed with 10 16" guns.(well that or basically an early Colorado class gets built) and Congress will probably have forked over the cash to get the construction of at least some modern cruisers and more destroyers than otl underway. Heck assuming they're feeling generous they might even fund some extra capital ships and given the situation I suspect the USN will have those be Battlecruisers if at all possible. And the cruisers and Battlecruisers will probably have pretty long legs for the era(which was typical for USN designs) which will make them fine commerce raiders

It would take a lot more than one person, Josephus Daniels is only one of the Congresscritters (hence why I said 'certain firebrands like Senator 'Pitchfork' Tillman die earlier') that have to be taken out of the picture for the USN to get its money from Congress. It would also require the USN to publish numerous in-depth reports on the geopolitical world to the press.

However, that would be easier said than done as quite a few papers were very pro-Britain.

 

[Knowledgeispower]

It would take a lot more than one person, Josephus Daniels is only one of the Congresscritters (hence why I said 'certain firebrands like Senator 'Pitchfork' Tillman die earlier') that have to be taken out of the picture for the USN to get its money from Congress. It would also require the USN to publish numerous in-depth reports on the geopolitical world to the press.

However, that would be easier said than done as quite a few papers were very pro-Britain.

Josephus Danieles was the Secretary of the Navy at the time and the damm idiot refused to let the USN use the 16" mk1 gun on the designs it submitted to Congress for approval to build for way too long because of his belief that it would cost more(which if they had been built like how the Colorados actually were wouldn't have been the case since they cost roughly as much as their predecessors)and look like the US was escalating the worldwide naval arms race. And unlike the 15"/42 of the RN the 16" MK1 had been tested prior to anything the USN wanted to be armed with it being laid down. If you look at the New Mexico class's intended orginal design it looks very similar to the Colorados intended orginal design ie 10 16" guns in 5 turrets with a bit better armor albeit than the Pennsylvanias(I think it was a half inch thicker in both deck and belt armor)by that point the USN negotiated it down to 8 16" guns and the same armor of their predecessors which while it wasn't as happy with could live with as they had learned how to deal with the man from the experience of trying to get their intended designs of the New Mexico and Tennessee classes through. Being involved in active shooting war would basically override those objections in new designs substantially earlier than otl and the Tennessees where still early enough in their build phase that their intended 12 14" armament could have been swapped out for 8 16" guns.